Council on Tuesday seemed ready to reject the administration's proposed 10-year lease for three floors of the Halle Brothers warehouse located just east of downtown. But FitzGerald convinced council to wait until their Nov. 12 meeting before taking final action.

"My suggestion is before we close the door on the Halle building proposal, we take a couple weeks and see if there are options," FitzGerald, a Democrat, said at the council meeting Tuesday. Re-opening the search could take up to 18 months, a county consultant said this week.

Meanwhile, the landlord for the warehouse, which also rents space in the building to the county board of elections, said they have been left in the lurch. Based on what the administration had said, Graystone Properties had entered into contract negotiations with the county to close the deal -- unbeknownst to at least some members of council -- including offering to invest $2.5 million to improve the building. The company even chose not to renew a lease with an existing tenant based on the understanding the county would be moving in.

But in August, the company learned council had serious concerns during the first public hearing on the deal, said business development officer David Fleming.

"We were blindsided," Fleming said. "We knew they had some frustrating experiences, but nobody from council ever reached out to us and said these are serious problems, and we're frustrated."

"They left us in a pretty bad bind here," he added.

Council members in interviews pointed the finger at the administration, saying they made their concerns known in June after touring the building, but Public Works Director Bonnie Teeuwen failed to pass the message along.

"This is a real communication breakdown, and not on our part," said Councilman Mike Gallagher, a Republican.

Councilman Dan Brady, a Democrat, said during Tuesday's council meeting he would vote against the deal, and was uncharacteristically outspoken in his criticism of the administration.

"It is a disappointment to some of us that the lead council members that have been involved in this process for this particular project have made it clear for many months that they have serious issues with it, but have seemingly been ignored or not taken seriously," Brady said. "I don't know how, for instance, the owners ... said they had people move out of the building. I can't imagine how they could have possibly come to the conclusion that this was a decision the council had already made."

Under the new county charter, council has final say in approving significant contracts.

Matt Carroll, FitzGerald's chief of staff, said the administration knew council had concerns, but didn't realize the deal was in jeopardy.

"If there was a lack of understanding from us on the seriousness of it, that's certainly a concern," Carroll said. "But we're trying to move forward and we have an opportunity to move forward. If it took longer to get here, that's unfortunate, but now we have the opportunity to come up with some kind of solution."

So what's council's problem with the lease?

Gallagher and Council President C. Ellen Connally, a Democrat, said they decided the warehouse doesn't meet the county's needs after touring it in June, citing the building's age and condition. They told a reporter following the Tuesday council meeting they also want the administration to develop a comprehensive archives management plan before moving into a new building.

The project has been in the works since the county solicited lease proposals in Sept. 2012. The administration narrowed down seven bidders to two finalists, presenting the results to council in April of this year.

After addressing questions from council in June but before the August public hearing, the administration entered into contract negotiations, according to a presentation a search consultant gave to council members earlier this week. (See full document below)

But Gallagher told Northeast Ohio Media Group he'd had no idea the discussions had advanced that far.

"I don't think anybody on council had an inkling that contract negotiations had started," he said. "If I had heard, I would have put a stop to it that day."

In this week's presentation to council, the consultant noted the fact that county staff have spent more than 500 hours on the project, and the county has paid $300,000 to the search consultant over an 18-month period.

Follow Us

cleveland.com is powered by Plain Dealer Publishing Co. and Northeast Ohio Media Group. All rights reserved (About Us).The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of Northeast Ohio Media Group LLC.